A lot of east and a lot of Atlantic in the sweepstakes. Looks like we’ll get to see lots of dahlin.

I guess it is what it is. The one positive of not getting dahlin increases the chances of not trading Karlsson. I don’t see any way that they would have had all three of Karlsson, chabot and dahlin here in 2-3 years. Insane D but not enough ice for the third guy.

I was hoping for #2 though. It all depends on what the other two GMs are thinking....still a chance Ottawa gets the guy they wanted at 2 anyway, but slim. Dorion will probably sell it as that anyway.

Buffalo is long overdue to win one of these things. I'm going with Buffalo, Carolina, Montreal.Being out of the top 3 means it's more likely Dorion gives the pick to Colorado, though I don't know how likely that is.

Can’t see Ottawa trading the pick. Let’s be honest, they’ll have trouble being worse than this year. Everything went wrong. Not saying they’ll make the playoffs but younger guys are moving up into bigger roles, goalies can’t be worse if they tried, etc.

Would really like a better system played though. I assumed Boucher would be a lock to be canned, but I’m not so sure.

I think you have to keep the pick and hope you’re better. Nothing worse than giving them number 4 this year and then winning a bunch of games next year with a loose no pressure team which they will be.

If they give the pick to Colorado, what kind of message does that send to the team? You're basically advertising your lack of confidence in them. "Yeah, we were terrible this year, but we figure the odds are good you guys will shit the bed even more next year..."

Ismellofhockey wrote:If they give the pick to Colorado, what kind of message does that send to the team? You're basically advertising your lack of confidence in them. "Yeah, we were terrible this year, but we figure the odds are good you guys will shit the bed even more next year..."

Are you saying that is a message they don't already understand as fact?

MP wrote:Basically, Vegas and NJ have proved you need players that can skate like the wind and produce. Tkachuk is neither of those things.

But character. And he could play next year, because that's what matters when you have a top 5 pick.

From a PR standpoint, sitting fourth makes Dorion's decision easier - he will no longer be tempted to take Tkachuk over Zadina or Svechnikov, as we're stuck taking whoever is still there. The speculation Boqvist is also in consideration is fine as well, I suppose.

According to the Bob, his survey of scouts determined Bouchard to be the 5th most highly regarded prospect, ahead of Boqvist who dropped to #6. Has there been speculation regarding Boqvist and the Sens?

I have no idea who I'm hoping they pick. PIcking Boqvist would scare me because they could see him as a salve for losing Karlsson.

I find it a bit surprising that we sometimes label Tkachuk as the eligible draft pick with the most character. Presumably because he has the most dominating physical presence? I'm not sure that its correct to assume he has the most character, its entirely possible one of the other similarly skilled picks available is the one with most character. Im not sure its proper to conflate the most physically dominating player as the one with the most character. I mean he may be, but he could also very well be the one with the least character.

I also dont like the way we sometimes denigrate the more truculent of similarly skilled players simply because he is physical. I of course agree that the game is changing, and skill even in the broad street bully era was always important. But these playoffs have been really physical. Its always a great role to have. Not at the expense of skill of course. But if two players are equally skilled and one has way more ability to change momentum in difficult games due to his physical play, it feels like some would still reject the physical player, as if in some sort of rage against past trauma

I’m not going to pretend to know anything about the top 4 draft eligibles, but I would like to see Ottawa start to choose raw skilled guys more often than character safe picks that will for sure play in the nhl. I’d take either European player of Tkatchuk simply because the son of a former nhler has had the upper hand in development over those two, yet both are ranked with him.

Take pure skill and upside with both first rounders and then develope them completely.

Dorion does scare me in his last interview he mentioned not once but twice that the top 4 can probably play in the league next year and make a team better. First, I don’t know if I want my top pick playing next year, and secondly if you’re banking on an 18 year old to make you better, you’re grasping at straws.

I do agree on physical players. Mid round I would start to look at physical forwards. Neil kind of made me annoyed at times but in the playoffs he was front and center and always earned his pay check. I think they’ve really missed a bit of that in the last year or so. They’re an easy team to play against. It would be nice to have someone who could skate and also had some edge up front.

sensdiehard wrote:I find it a bit surprising that we sometimes label Tkachuk as the eligible draft pick with the most character. Presumably because he has the most dominating physical presence? I'm not sure that its correct to assume he has the most character, its entirely possible one of the other similarly skilled picks available is the one with most character. Im not sure its proper to conflate the most physically dominating player as the one with the most character. I mean he may be, but he could also very well be the one with the least character.

I also dont like the way we sometimes denigrate the more truculent of similarly skilled players simply because he is physical. I of course agree that the game is changing, and skill even in the broad street bully era was always important. But these playoffs have been really physical. Its always a great role to have. Not at the expense of skill of course. But if two players are equally skilled and one has way more ability to change momentum in difficult games due to his physical play, it feels like some would still reject the physical player, as if in some sort of rage against past trauma

As somebody who made a reference to character, it's purely a jab at Dorion's habit of putting that particular characteristic above all others. But point well taken that the more physical player is not necessarily the one with more character, even if the association is often made. Zadina in particular has been lauded as a teammate several times. The story that got a lot of press was that after landing back in Halifax this year from the World Juniors, the coaches told him to rest for the day rather than jump right into a game, but instead Zadina hung around and started loading the bus with hockey bags as a way to contribute.

Rico put it more maturely than I did - at #4 we should be prioritizing skill and long-term upside. Dorion emphasizing in several interviews that at #4 we will get a character player who can play next year is all kinds of backwards in terms of what I would want the team to focus on with that pick. But your point is well taken that we shouldn't automatically conflate that with the possibility that Dorion's preference would be Tkachuk, especially as his underwhelming production in college suggests he may be the least ready to produce right away among the three wingers.

I don’t follow prospects at all, so I rely on people such as yourself to inform me. If Tkachuks freshman year is really telling of his low ceiling then I would also probably not want him over some of the other likely more skilled players.

Definitely wouldn’t want to pass up on the next Datsyuk for the next Keith Tkachuk. But wouldn’t want to miss out on the next Tom Wilson for a Tyler Arnason either.

To me, character players and physical players are still really important, and so if Dorion does value that im happy. And given those 4 thru 8 draft spots are seen as pretty close, to the point that some Sens fans want to trade back our 4th for a 6th or 7th to get another pick, then the skill must be pretty close between them. And in that case, the one that is skilled and a physical character player has the edge for me. Perhaps thats Kostaniemi though

I'd be happy to pick up a 2nd rounder to move down a spot or two if they're confident their pick will still be there. But when is the last time the Sens moved down? Has it ever happened? Dorion is a scout at heart. They know who they want and they want him now.

sensdiehard wrote:I don’t follow prospects at all, so I rely on people such as yourself to inform me. If Tkachuks freshman year is really telling of his low ceiling then I would also probably not want him over some of the other likely more skilled players.

Definitely wouldn’t want to pass up on the next Datsyuk for the next Keith Tkachuk. But wouldn’t want to miss out on the next Tom Wilson for a Tyler Arnason either.

To me, character players and physical players are still really important, and so if Dorion does value that im happy. And given those 4 thru 8 draft spots are seen as pretty close, to the point that some Sens fans want to trade back our 4th for a 6th or 7th to get another pick, then the skill must be pretty close between them. And in that case, the one that is skilled and a physical character player has the edge for me. Perhaps thats Kostaniemi though

Personally, I'm not sure what to make of Tkachuk's ceiling, nor are many. It's not just his production this year at BU that is a question. Last year at the USNTDP, he was outscored by guys like Norris, Mismash and Barratt, only one of whom (Norris) is a first rounder. Tkachuk was the youngest of the four, but only a couple months younger than Norris, who is a centre and hardly the most exciting prospect around. Some people (eg. Corey Pronman) had Tkachuk way down in the teens out of concern about offensive upside and production, only to move him up later in the year based upon further viewings that showed him more involved offensively in college. To the eye, he looks more like a top ten, even top 5 pick than based upon his production, and that's important for projection.

Brady is considered to be more raw but perhaps more toolsy than his brother, and in my limited viewings of him he does indeed drive the play more than guys like Norris tend to do. His skating and puck skills are good for a player his size, so if he develops into a similar or even slightly better player than his brother Matthew, that's great. But Matthew was a much more productive player pre-draft, and probably has better natural hockey sense and playmaking ability, but less a bit less dynamic in transition. But they're similar players and that's perfectly fine - had Calgary prioritized pure skill over Matthew's skill set, they may have ended up with Alex Nylander (not sure what's happening there). On the other hand, you take a power winger over skill and you can end up with Jake Virtanen over William Nylander, as Vancouver did. If I was the scouting staff and I was scrutinizing Brady Tkachuk's play, I'd really drill in on his hockey sense in the offensive zone, because that is going to be the key in projecting his long term impact.

To be very clear, I'd be fine with Tkachuk at 4, but I would be upset if we passed on Svechnikov or Zadina to do so, because those two have a very good chance of being first line wingers, Svechnikov especially. Beyond those three, it's a mixed bag of about 6 very good players, each with a question mark or two, some more projectable than others. If our scouting staff - which generally has a good track record - felt very strongly about Wahlstrom, Boqvist or another one of those players over Tkachuk that's fine, provided that assessment is based on upside and projection. I'm not disputing the value of character and physical play, but in the top 5 I wouldn't prioritize those facets over skill, especially considering how hard it is in this league to find elite players (and how many of the top forwards are top 5 picks).

In short, unless we do a full tear down rebuild - and I don't know what Dorion's plan is (nor does he, I think), but that doesn't seem to be it - this is a huge opportunity to add a core player not only for next year but for 7-10 years. It's unfortunate we aren't in the top 3, as that would give us a better shot, in my estimation, to land such a player, but sitting at #4 we are either going to take a much riskier player (eg. Boqvist), or somebody with perhaps less ceiling (eg. Tkachuk, maybe Bouchard). As long as we aren't doing so aiming for Tom Wilson, who I don't think would move the needle for this franchise, I'm relatively agnostic on who that is for the time being. I like Kotkaniemi, but I wouldn't trade back unless we felt very strongly about his upside. Having used recent first rounders on centres (Brown, White), I'm also not sure position would weight heavily in his favour either.